President Obama Answers 6 Questions on Climate Change

Among people who contend regularly with the reality of climate change—scientists, policymakers, activists, journalists—there is a certain shared facial expression that materializes as soon as the subject is raised. The look is downcast, weary, despairing. “Are you sitting down?” the expression seems to say. “Are you prepared for this?”

The rising seas, severe drought, and extreme storms they then describe are not just future certainties: These are effects we are already living with. 2015 is on track to be the hottest year on record. Climate change is here, and with it heightening humanitarian and security concerns. “It’s not a coincidence,” Secretary of State John Kerry said earlier this month, “that immediately prior to the civil war in Syria, the country experienced its worst drought on record.”

And yet even the most grizzled of climate-change veterans are harboring hope for the COP21, the United Nations summit that almost didn’t begin in Paris today. Almost didn’t, of course, because of the terror attacks that claimed the lives of 130 in that city two weeks ago and sent fresh fear reverberating across Europe and beyond; attacks reportedly carried out by ISIS, the very movement that has made a stronghold of drought-ravaged Syria.

Veterans are holding out hope for this year’s climate summit because, if all goes as planned, in two weeks the world will have its first real agreement to lower carbon emissions and begin addressing global warming.

If you are a casual observer of climate negotiations, you may not have realized that we do not yet have such an agreement. The Kyoto Protocol? It held developed nations more accountable than developing nations, leaving out China and India, and was ultimately a deal that countries could change their minds about. It also was not ratified by the United States. The Copenhagen Accord? It took steps to hold both rich and poor nations responsible, and promised funding to poor countries affected by warming, but was merely a statement of intention, not a binding deal.

The path to Paris has been different. Groundwork has been carefully laid, and many world leaders and negotiators are arriving today having already made pledges. Most critically, the United States has promised to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 26 percent from 2005 levels, and China, the world’s largest emitter, has promised its emissions will peak by 2030. Taken together, the pledges are still not enough to avoid 2 degrees Celsius of warming, the number scientists have identified as a dangerous tipping point. But they do amount to the biggest cut ever achieved. And if an accord is reached in Paris, a framework will be in place for ratcheting up emissions targets in the future.

It is custom for President Obama to visit the annual United Nations climate summit toward the end of the two-week negotiations, when the parties are closer to reaching, or rather not reaching, a resolution. This year, signaling a new sense of urgency, Obama kicked off the talks with a speech in Paris. “I come here personally as the leader of the world’s biggest economy and second biggest emitter,” the president said this morning, “to say that America not only acknowledges its role in climate change but embraces doing something about it.”

Ahead of the summit, Vogue asked the president what exactly we can do about it, and five other questions on climate change. Here, his responses.

The United Nations conference on climate change happens every year. Why is this year’s gathering so important?

This year we’re aiming to reach a new international climate agreement that will ensure that not just America but all countries take meaningful action to reduce the impacts of climate change. The urgency for an agreement has never been greater. We have a deeper recognition, based on solidifying science and what we now see with our own eyes, that climate change is a threat to our global economy and stability. So there’s a serious desire to forge a new agreement, one where all countries set targets to reduce carbon pollution, report on their progress, and increase their actions over time. If we can get this done, I’m confident that future generations will look back on Paris as a moment when the entire world rallied around climate action in the form of an ambitious agreement to leave our children and grandchildren with a safer and more secure planet.

What are your most pressing objectives at the COP21?

Paris presents an opportunity for us to achieve an ambitious framework for long-term action to prevent the worst effects of climate change. A strong agreement, based on ambitious climate targets set by individual countries, with a robust system of transparency, will put in place a durable framework for reducing the dangerous emissions that contribute to climate change. We also hope to see a shared effort among all countries to drive more public and private financing to those who will be most severely affected by a changing climate. By securing an ambitious, transparent, and durable international climate agreement in Paris, we can ensure that everyone is on a level playing field and that countries are held accountable for their climate commitments.

How much must emissions be cut to avoid reaching the critical threshold of 2 degrees Celsius of warming?

Independent analysis shows that, without action, global temperatures will rise to dangerous levels that could put our planet on a path of no return. The fact is, we’ve already added so much carbon pollution and greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere that even if countries implement their current targets to reduce emissions, temperatures will keep rising for a while. But if we’re going to prevent large parts of this earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’ve got to accelerate our action now. That’s why a successful Paris agreement has to serve as a starting point for more ambitious reductions in the decades to come. If we act, we can still keep global warming below the threshold that the scientific community has unanimously acknowledged is necessary to avoid the most severe impacts of climate change.

Who are left most vulnerable by the effects of climate change?

We know that climate change can and will affect every segment of the population, whether through rising sea levels, more intense flooding, more extreme droughts, or stronger storms. But we also know there are factors that exacerbate the vulnerability of certain populations. Low-income and tribal communities, as well as some communities of color, tend to be more at risk, due in part to limited capacity and resources necessary to prepare and adapt. I witnessed this firsthand when I visited the Alaskan Arctic in September, where villages like Kotzebue and Kivalina island are receding into the ocean as a result of rising sea levels. Make no mistake, the looming crisis in the Alaska Arctic is a tangible preview of the looming crisis of the global condition. To address this, we’ve announced a series of steps, including funding to help our communities become more resilient and prepare for the impacts of climate change that we can no longer avoid.

What was the significance of the United States rejecting the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline?

The Keystone pipeline came to occupy an overinflated role in our political discourse. It became a symbol rather than a serious policy matter. America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious action to fight climate change. Approving the project would have undercut that global leadership. The Keystone pipeline would have been inconsistent with our efforts to move to cleaner energy sources, at a critical moment when the world needs to accelerate transition to a low-carbon, climate-resilient economy. And that’s the biggest risk we face—not acting.

What can we as citizens do to reduce carbon emissions?

One of the most important things you can do is get engaged. This is not just a job for politicians. Educate people. Tell them what’s at stake. Speak up at town halls and in church groups and at PTA meetings. Push back on willful misinformation. Speak up for facts. Convince folks in power, at every level, to reduce carbon pollution. The biggest corporations in America are adopting energy-efficiency measures and switching to clean energy, not just because it’s good for the planet, but because it’s finally good for our bottom line. So push your own schools and businesses and communities to adopt smarter practices. Over the past seven years, this country has proven that there is no contradiction between a sound environment and strong economic growth. If we care about American leadership, if we truly care about leaving a stable, sustainable planet to the next generation, then we’ve got to make action on climate a prerequisite for our vote.